AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Gopal Krishan VyasÂ
The instant special appeal has been filed by the Rajasthan Nursing Council, Jaipur through its Registrar under Rule 134 of the Rajasthan High
Court Rules read with Article 225 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 1.2.2018 passed by the learned Single Judger in SBCWP
No.8149/2015Â by which the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition and issued directions to the respondent no.2 to consider the request of the
petitioners expeditiously preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of the order and if the petitioners
otherwise eligible, necessary registration may be granted to them.Â
 As per the facts of the case, the petitioners-respondents acquired qualification of ANM/GNM Course from respondent Singhania University and
in the writ petition it was stated that the
Singhania University is established under Section 2F of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956 and as such the same is institution established
under the statue, therefore, the degree/diploma granted by the said University does not require any further recognition.  It was submitted that
after acquiring ANM/GNM qualification, the petitioners-respondents approached the appellant for registration and requested them to provide
registration, but the appellant Rajasthan Nursing Council (hereinafter referred to as the appellant RNC for short) refused to register them without
any reason.Â
 In the writ petition the petitioners-respondents stated that technical division of Ministry of Education and Youth Service, Government of India has
issued circular in which it is provided that degree/diploma awarded by the institutes deemed as University under Section 3 of the UGC Act had been
automatically recognized by the Government of India for the purpose of employment and no other recognition is needed. Â
The respondent-appellant filed its reply to the writ petition and submits that ground taken by the petitioners-respondents is absolutely
misconceived and deserves to be rejected because appellant RNC is regulatory body for the State of Rajasthan and without any inspection the so
called degree/diploma given by the Singhania University cannot be recognized.Â
The learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition vide judgment impugned dated 1.2.2018 and held that since the respondent University is
established under the statute, therefore, there is no requirement of any separate recognition from the appellant RNC, therefore, consider the request of
the petitioners expeditiously preferably within a period of two months and if the petitioner otherwise eligible necessary registration may be granted to
them. Â
In this appeal, the appellant RNC has challenged the validity of the judgment dated 1.2.2018. Â
Learned counsel for the appellant argued that there is no doubt that the Singhania University was constituted under Section 2F of the University
Grants Commission, 1956, however, the provisions of the State Act would reveal that the appellant RNC is regulatory body for the State of Rajasthan
with regard to grant of recognition in the State, therefore, further recognition is necessary from the appellant RNC. Learned counsel for the
appellant submits that a grave error has been committed by the learned Single Judge to allow the writ petition while following the judgment of
Punjab and Haryana High Court rendered in the case of Ms. Neelam Devi & Anr. Vs. Haryana Nurses Registration Council & Ors. (Civil Writ
Petition No.4021/2009), decided on 19.2.2010 reported in 2010 158 PLR 323, so also wrongly applied the judgment in the case of Mrs. Madhu Santosh
Vs. State of Rajasthan (SBCWP NO.2502/1989), decided on 21.2.1991 because once the Legislature has enacted a special law for the State of
Rajasthan and constituted a body known as Rajasthan Nursing Council, the University may be established under the Act, but it is required
recognition by the appellant RNC.Â
According to the learned counsel for the appellant Singhania University has not taken any recognition from the appellant RNC nor the same was
inspected by the appellant RNC, therefore, the judgment of the learned Single Judge is not tenable in law. Lastly, it is argued by learned counsel
for the appellant that a grave error has been committed by the learned Single Judge in allowing the writ petition while following the earlier judgments,
therefore, the impugned judgment may be quashed and set aside. In support of his arguments, the learned counsel for the appellant citied judgment
of this court in the case of Gand Mal Dhaker & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan (DBSAW No.955/2011), decided on 17.2.2017. Â
Learned counsel appearing for the respondents vehemently argued that there is no strength in the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant that
the University which is established by law is required to take recognition from the appellant RNC for the purpose of ANM/GNM course because the
Singhania University is established by law, therefore, there is no question for appellant RNC to deny registration to the students who acquired
qualification of ANM/GNM from the Singhania University. Learned Single Judge while relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
the case of Dr. B.L. Asawa Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors reported in AIR 1982 SC 933 held that degree or diploma granted by the Singhania
University, established by law or under the law is not required to get recognition by other authority. The same view was taken in the case
of Mrs. Madhu Santosh Vs. State of Rajasthan (SBCWP NO.2502/1989), decided on 21.2.1991 and in case of Ms. Neelam Devi & Anr. Vs.
Haryana Nurses Registration Council & Ors. (Civil Writ Petition No.4021/2009), decided on 19.2.2010 reported in 2010 158 PLR 323, therefore, once
the adjudication has already been made by this court and Punjab High Court, then there is no question for denial of registration to the students
who acquired ANM/GNM Course from Singhania University, which is established under the Act.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties, first of all it is required to be observed that in the grounds of the writ petition no other ground has been
taken by the appellant except the ground which is incorporated and mentioned above. The only argument and ground taken in the appeal is that
registration is required from appellant RNC by the Singhania University, which is established by law.Â
We have considered the rival submissions and come to the conclusion that once the controversy has already been adjudicated by the Hon'ble Apex
Court in the case of Dr. B.L. Asawa Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors reported in AIR 1982 SC 933 and in case of Mrs. Madhu Santosh Vs. State of
Rajasthan (SBCWP NO.2502/1989), decided on 21.2.1991 while relying upon the aforesaid judgment then there is no question to hold that any error
has been committed by the learned Single Judge in directing the appellant RNC so as to deny the registration on the pretext that recognition is
necessary from the appellant Rajasthan Nusing Council. Â
We are of the firmed opinion that if any University is established by law and imparting the course in the form of diploma and degree or qualification,
that cannot be questioned by the appellant RNC for the purpose of registration.Â
We have considered the judgment cited by the learned counsel for the appellant in the case of Gand Mal Dhaker & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
(DBSAW No.955/2011), decided on 17.2.2017 in which question of appointment and qualification was involved and hear the controversy is only
with regard to registration, therefore, the judgment rendered in aforesaid case not applicable in the present case.Â
In our opinion no error has been committed by the learned Single Judge so as to allow the writ petition filed by the respondents while following the
adjudication made by the Hon'ble Apex Court , in the case of Dr. B.L. Asawa (Supra) which is subsequently followed by this court in the case of
Mrs. Madhu Santosh (supra).Â
Consequently, the instant special appeal is hereby dismissed. Â